MA: Any objective facts of domestic violence inside on a 911 call supports entry

There is weighty interest of the state in preventing and prosecuting domestic violence. Accordingly, the court almost comes out and says that police get the benefit of the doubt for a warrantless entry under the emergency aid exception if any facts objectively support that an act of violence happened inside. Commonwealth v. Gordon, 87 Mass. App. Ct. 322 (May 5, 2015):

“Police must often make balanced choices. Domestic violence situations require police to make particularly delicate and difficult judgments quickly.” Fletcher v. Clinton, 196 F.3d 41, 50 (1st Cir. 1999). See Georgia v. Randolph, 547 U.S. 103, 118, 126 S. Ct. 1515, 164 L. Ed. 2d 208 (2006). There is a very strong public policy in this Commonwealth against domestic violence. We think that it is consistent with this strong public policy to recognize that evidence that a person requesting police assistance may have been the victim of domestic violence is a factor that police may consider in determining whether an emergency exists involving a particular individual and whether a warrantless entry is reasonably necessary to render assistance under the emergency aid exception. As the Washington Supreme Court has observed: “[T]he fact that police are responding to a situation that likely involves domestic violence may be an important factor in evaluating both the subjective belief of the officer that someone likely needs assistance and in assessing the reasonableness of the officer’s belief that there is an imminent threat of injury.” State v. Shultz, 170 Wn.2d 746, 756, 248 P.3d 484 (2011).

. . .

This case more closely resembles Commonwealth v. Lindsey, 72 Mass. App. Ct. at 488-490, where we concluded that the police properly relied on the emergency aid exception to conduct a warrantless entry into a house. In Lindsey, a 911 caller reported an elderly woman trembling outside the caller’s house and asking for help. Id. at 486. Officers arrived on scene. The caller, a neighbor, informed the officers of the elderly woman’s poor health. She had been asking for help and pointing behind her at her house, which she shared with her son. Because a search for the woman had proved unavailing, officers concluded that she had likely gone back into her house and that she might be in need of emergency medical assistance. Id. at 487. Because the front door was locked, fire fighters forced it open. Once inside, the police officers saw a number of incriminating items in plain view, which they seized. Ibid.

In the case before us, the police did not have direct evidence that Kay was the victim of domestic violence, but they had an objectively reasonable basis for the belief that she had been the victim of a domestic violence incident only minutes before they arrived based on the evidence they gathered at the scene. The police also had an objectively reasonable basis for the belief that after requesting police assistance, Kay returned to the apartment where the incident had occurred, that no one had entered or left that apartment since they arrived at the scene, and that her boy friend, whose vehicle was in the driveway, also was nearby and could be present with her in the apartment. On the basis of these facts and the reasonable inferences that could be drawn from them, the police had the right to make a warrantless entry into the apartment to determine if Kay was in need of emergency aid.